BCT’s for beam protection L. Søby On behalf of D. Belohrad, L. Jensen and P. Odier 6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 1

Outline DCCTs LS1 upgrades and status SBF BCCM (FBCT) LS1 installations and present status First results Summary 6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 2

DCCT upgrades and status New CPU and FESA class New ADC: VD80 MTT module driver update by BE-CO 6/12/15 Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 3 Fibers to CCR modified MPS changes on receiving end as well Good collaboration between, CO, MP, and BI to solve all issues.

DCCT upgrades and status System B Beam 2 is twice more noisy than 3 other DCCTs. But still within 1% of one nominal bunch. P. Odier will try to improve during TS1. But only hysteresis can cure the problem of flickering of the SBF. M. Ludwig increased averaging from 1s to e.g.16s from 500GeV, implemented. Only active on system B B2. 6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 4 Courtesy A. Apollonio

6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 5 DCCT SBF System operational SBF “false” has on some occasions created beam dumps, even though intensity was safe. Status on VISTAR “False” with low intensity, not clear to BI why. To diagnostic SBF errors, logging in Timber (SBF, mode (e.g. forced), intensity.) is a must. This is a request

SBF reliability 6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 6 BI writes intensity (22bits with a few verifications) into MTT driver (CO responsibility). From there on responsibility is unclear for me. BUT…Wrong scaling factors (FESA variables) and offset values (sequencer) will give wrong intensity and as consequence a wrong SBF. Currently mitigated by use of redundant system – SBF derived from highest intensity from 2 separate DCCT’s Short term improvement: Scaling factor hard coded in SW, but still need to read and correct offset Long term solution (specifications needed!) DCCT 24 bit system (BI VFC) with FPGA and direct fiber link to MPS. Implemented once the 24 bit system has been qualified (front-end in radiation area) Offset variations to be logged during the year (~5E9). Can they be hard coded to zero in firmware? Completely different hardwareas e.g. beam presence flag?

BCCM 6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 7

4 units installed during LS1 Bunch and orbit clock, energy from BST fiber CIBU links commissioned Operational system (A) Development system (B) ICT, Beam1 and BCTW, Beam2 New stable firmware Realistic thresholds set to since 8/ New FESA class, still not 100% operational Data analysis and logging in Timber QT based Python scripts used to evaluate performance 6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 8 BCCM status

6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 9 Window [T] Noise floor [Bits] Scale [Ch/Bit] Threshold [Bit] Threshold [Ch] WC Threshold [Ch] E E104E E E 102.1E E E 91.1E E E 94.6E E E 92.1E E E 91.5E9 BCCM status Since beginning of Run 2 the 6 loss windows were set very high. Since Monday reduced to more realistic values and can be further decreased.

BCCM performance 1T 6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 10 BCTFB1 A Threshold = 4E10 Pilot Noise floor Amplitude Difference ~2.5 E 11

6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 11 BCCM performance 1024T Threshold =1.5E9 Triggered on all windows Pilot only triggered on 64,256 and 1024T BCTFB1 A ~2.5 E 11 Only triggered on 64,256 and 1024T. Slow loss?

6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams T FBCT / BCTI performance Pink = FBCT Brown = BCTI Limits threshold

FBCT / BCTW performance 6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 13 Pink = FBCT Brown = BCTW FBCT sensitive to beam movements 1024T

Summary DCCT SBF System B2, 2 times more noisy, P. Odier will try to reduce. SBF: Not clear to BI why it goes unsafe at low intensity. Need diagnostics: SBF, mode, received intensity. SBF SIL level is low: Scaling factors, offsets For new system: specifications are needed. BCCM Thresholds set to reasonable values, can be lowered. System is “stable” and detects beam dumps/losses correctly, TBC. FESA class will be operational after TS1, very important for commissioning. The system will not be “operational” after TS1, but the complete system (FESA + hardware) is in its final configuration. We therefore propose to monitor the system “operationally” but without active interlocks until mid August (return of HW expert). Depending on the results we can then make them active. 6/12/15Internal workshop ON MPP readiness for MJ beams 14